Sync two test files that never reached the publishing repo - #32
Conversation
Both exist in the monorepo and have NEVER run in this repo's CI. ## test_rename_does_not_hide_behaviour.py (3 tests) The acceptance tests for intentumdiff-core#18: a rename that also changed the body was collapsed into a single REFACTORING, discarding the behavioural change and telling the reviewer nothing had changed. That is the worst output this engine can produce, and the guard against it has never executed here. Gated on the engine fix, which is verified present on core's RC (`carries_entity_name` in draft_suppressors.rs) before syncing - landing the test first would have arrived red. ## test_live_server_asset_diff.py (13 tests) Covers the live-server asset_diff op. Verified the op exists on this branch (5 references in live_server.py) before syncing, same reason. ## Held back deliberately test_uast_structural_facts.py is NOT in this commit. Its 4 tests need the early_exit_count / negated_condition_count / has_guard_clause fields on NodeFacts, which are still only on the unmerged fix/uast-facts-cross-boundary branch. Landing them now would put 4 red tests on the release branch. They follow once #26 merges. ## Verification note These cannot be validated from a bare clone: running them here raises PluginNotFoundError('unknown') because parser components are not staged outside CI - the condition tracked as #22. CI is the verification, which is the standing model for this repo (the monorepo has no CI at all). Found by auditing why the CI suite collects 84 fewer tests than the monorepo. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 53915c9d26
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def _kinds(old: str, new: str) -> list[str]: | ||
| diff = SemanticDiffer().diff_strings(old, new, "billing.py") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When SPLIT_REPO_TOKEN is unavailable on Dependabot or fork PRs, .github/workflows/ci.yml lines 66-75 deliberately skip parser-component provisioning, but lines 92-104 still collect this module; the unconditional billing.py diff then raises PluginNotFoundError('unknown') instead of running the assertions, making the newly introduced test fail the reduced CI lane. Deselect this module there or skip it with an already-classified staging reason when the Python parser is unavailable.
AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L7-L8
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Two test files exist in the monorepo and have never run in this repo's CI.
test_rename_does_not_hide_behaviour.py— 3 testsThe acceptance tests for intentumdiff-core#18: a rename that also changed the body was collapsed into a single
REFACTORING, discarding the behavioural change and telling the reviewer nothing had changed.That is the worst output this engine can produce — and the guard against it has never executed in the repo that publishes the wheel.
test_live_server_asset_diff.py— 13 testsCovers the live-server
asset_diffop.Gates checked before syncing
A test that lands before its production code arrives red and gets blamed on the test. Both were verified first:
carries_entity_namein core'sdraft_suppressors.rsasset_diffin this branch'slive_server.pyearly_exit_countonNodeFactsDeliberately held back
test_uast_structural_facts.pyis not in this PR. Its 4 tests need theearly_exit_count/negated_condition_count/has_guard_clausefields, which are still only on the unmergedfix/uast-facts-cross-boundarybranch (#26). Landing them now would put 4 red tests on the release branch. They follow once that merges.Verification note
These cannot be validated from a bare clone — running them locally raises
PluginNotFoundError('unknown')because parser components are not staged outside CI, the condition tracked as #22. CI is the verification here, which is the standing model: the monorepo has no CI at all.How this was found
By auditing why this repo's CI collects 84 fewer tests than the monorepo. 89 tests never run here: 65 hidden by a conditional
collect_ignore, 24 never synced. This PR closes 16 of the 24.🤖 Generated with Claude Code